More than 1,000 medical professionals have urged peers to reject plans that would allow abortion up to the point of birth.
In a letter to the House of Lords, 1,015 senior obstetricians, gynaecologists, midwives and medical professors raised “grave concerns” about proposals to decriminalise abortion throughout pregnancy.
Peers are set to vote on the issue on Wednesday as the Crime and Policing Bill reaches report stage.
The controversial measure was introduced last year by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi as a surprise amendment to the Government’s legislation.
MPs debated the proposal for just 46 minutes before approving it by 379 votes to 137.
The medical professionals warned the change could pose “serious risks to women’s health, particularly given the medical dangers associated with late, self-administered abortions”.
If passed, it would mark the most significant overhaul of abortion law in Britain for 50 years.
Under the amendment, women would be able to terminate a pregnancy for any reason — including dissatisfaction with the sex of the baby.
The controversial measure was introduced last year by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi
|
GETTY
Doctors are also urging peers to back a separate amendment requiring face-to-face consultations before abortion pills can be prescribed.
The “pills by post” scheme, introduced during the Covid pandemic and made permanent in 2022, allows women to access abortion medication without seeing a doctor in person.
Campaigners have warned the system increases the risk of coercion.
In one case, Stuart Worby, 40, secretly added abortion pills to a woman’s drink, causing her to miscarry.
The ‘pills by post’ scheme allows women to access abortion medication without seeing a doctor
|
GETTY
The letter notes that restoring in-person appointments is “an important part of safeguarding (to protect against coerced abortion) and would enable medical professionals to ensure that abortion pills are only prescribed in cases when it is both medically safe and legally compliant to do so”.
Two amendments will be voted on in the Lords on Wednesday.
One would remove the abortion provisions from the bill entirely, while the other would require in-person consultations before abortion medication is prescribed.
Both have attracted support from female peers across the political spectrum, including those who identify as pro-choice and pro-life.
Both amendments have attracted support from female peers across the political spectrum
|
GETTY
Backers include former Olympian Baroness Davies, former Ofsted chief Baroness Spielman and Baroness Hollins, a past president of the British Medical Association.
Baroness Monckton, who tabled the amendment to remove clause 208, said: “This radical clause was added to the Bill after less than an hour of debate by MPs, and without the necessary scrutiny required for an issue of such seriousness.
“Whatever one’s views on abortion, this is not how responsible laws are made.”
Meanwhile, Baroness Stroud said: “I, and many others, warned of the dangers of the ‘pills by post’ scheme when it was introduced. Sadly, those warnings have come true.”
Backers of the amendments include former Olympian Baroness Davies
|
PAShe added: “This change has widespread public support and would better protect women by helping prevent further cases of coerced or dangerous late-term abortions linked to the pills by post scheme.”
Former Justice minister Laura Farris, who describes herself as pro-choice, has also raised concerns about “unintended consequences” of the proposal.
She had been due to respond on behalf of the Government to a similar amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill in 2024, before it fell when the general election was called.
Ms Farris has warned the consequences have “not been fully thought through”.
Her letter reads: “A few hours of debate, in the context of a Government Bill, without the amendment even having been considered at Committee stage in the Commons, is not the right approach for this.”
She added: “If it is the will of Parliament to make this change, the Government should facilitate proper policy and legal thinking on this matter and make time for proper scrutiny.”
If peers approve the amendments, MPs will be forced to reconsider the changes when the bill returns to the Commons.